Jodice v. County of Humboldt, Humboldt County Bd. of Sup'rs

39 F.3d 1187 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Carol Jean JODICE; Jerry Jodice, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT, Humboldt County Board of Supervisors; Ann Sparks, an individual; Harry Pritchard; Wesley Chesbro; Arthur Eddy, Dennis McCleallan; Randy Nikolaus; James Lough and J. Bruce Rupp, an individual; Steven Strawn, an individual, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-16210. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 6, 1994. Decided Nov. 1, 1994. Before: GOODWIN, O'SCANNLAIN, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Carol and Jerry Jodice ("Carol" and "Jerry") appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Humboldt County and nine individual defendants who held various Humboldt County appointed and elected positions. We affirm. 3 A grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Jones v. Union Pac. R.R., 968 F.2d 937, 940 (9th Cir.1992). We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the…